Angry in the Great White North

This might be a first.  A key member of the IPCC has admitted that the key report put out by the UN global warming guys included a lie, deliberately inserted in order to trick politicians into panicking:

The scientist behind the bogus claim in a Nobel Prize-winning UN report that Himalayan glaciers will have melted by 2035 last night admitted it was included purely to put political pressure on world leaders.

Dr Murari Lal also said he was well aware the statement, in the 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), did not rest on peer-reviewed scientific research.

In an interview with The Mail on Sunday, Dr Lal, the co-ordinating lead author of the report's chapter on Asia, said: 'It related to several countries in this region and their water sources. We thought that if we can highlight it, it will impact policy-makers and politicians and encourage them to take some concrete action.

'It had importance for the region, so we thought we should put it in.'

Dr Lal's admission will only add to the mounting furore over the melting glaciers assertion, which the IPCC was last week forced to withdraw because it has no scientific foundation.

The "mounting furore" is aimed at the wrong people if it is aimed IPCC Chair Raj Pachauri and his cabal of liars.  The only power they have if the power our politicians give them.  Politicians respond to us.

So we need to strangle this at the source.  We need to make it clear that we don't buy the lies any longer.  Once our politicians realize they won't pay a political price at home if they stand up and call out the liars for being liars, that, instead, they'll be rewarded for it, then they'll do exactly that.  The IPCC will shrivel and die as it is denied the attention its members crave.

Politicians are no different from other people.  They don't like to be lied to, and they'll be angry with people who lie to them, angry with people who are seeking to trick them with those lies.  But politicians are constrained by the nature of their position to suck it up if that's what the electorate wants them to do.

Let them know they don't have to suck it up any longer. 

What about politicians without electorates?  In a situation like this, can we expect dictators to save the day?  They don't have to win elections, so they can ignore the wishes of their people as they see fit.  That's all true, but it is also true that when it comes to the global warming fraud, dictators have the most to gain.  They control countries that, according to the IPCC, must be paid compensation by industrial democracies.  So we can't expect any help from them.  It'll be up to the democracies to shut the IPCC down.  As a bonus, it'll piss off a bunch of kleptocracies, all waiting eagerly for their "global warming" welfare cheques.